of the ten students involved, providing them with a status report and the opportunity for input.

The end results:

- The faculty decided to allow students who had begun the program under one set of standards to finish under that same set.

- The faculty felt validated and supported.

- The faculty felt that their standards had been upheld and the integrity of the pro

Mark has been in his current position for about a year. He is Vice President for Academic Affairs at a small liberal arts college in the Northeast. His boss is the president of the college, and his direct reports are the deans and directors of academic programs. His goal: to change a culture. In the one he's now in, there's a fairly high degree of mistrust and behavior ranging from vaguely disrespectful to openly adversarial. Our colleagues and clients in higher education report that this type of environment is common. The vision Mark holds is a culture of collaboration and appreciation for the important role each person has to play.

Recently, there was an upset, the kind of fire that happens in every organization. In the Computer Science program, the faculty had decided to raise standards for graduation. Students who had begun the program were upset. Faculty felt strongly that the new standards were justified and necessary for the integrity of the program.

Mark immediately arranged meetings with both the faculty and the students. The day before, one of the faculty members came in with concerns. He was tense and jittery, his body language indicating that he didn't trust that he would be supported.

That Tuesday, Mark met first with the faculty. He invited everyone to speak, giving each his full attention. He listened from an attitude of inclusiveness and respect, and he listened for what was important to each person. He asked questions sourced from what he was hearing. Then he and the faculty met individually with each of the ten students involved, providing them with a status report and the opportunity for input.

The end results:

- The faculty decided to allow students who had begun the program under one set of standards to finish under that same set.

- The faculty felt validated and supported.

- The faculty felt that their standards had been upheld and the integrity of the prog

ly disrespectful to openly adversarial. Our colleagues and clients in higher education report that this type of environment is common. The vision Mark holds is a culture of collaboration and appreciation for the important role each person has to play.

Recently, there was an upset, the kind of fire that happens in every organization. In the Computer Science program, the faculty had decided to raise standards for graduation. Students who had begun the program were upset. Faculty felt strongly that the new standards were justified and necessary for the integrity of the program.

Mark immediately arranged meetings with both the faculty and the students. The day before, one of the faculty members came in with concerns. He was tense and jittery, his body language indicating that he didn't trust that he would be supported.

That Tuesday, Mark met first with the faculty. He invited everyone to speak, giving each his full attention. He listened from an attitude of inclusiveness and respect, and he listened for what was important to each person. He asked questions sourced from what he was hearing. Then he and the faculty met individually with each of the ten students involved, providing them with a status report and the opportunity for input.

The end results:

- The faculty decided to allow students who had begun the program under one set of standards to finish under that same set.

- The faculty felt validated and supported.

- The faculty felt that their standards had been upheld and the integrity of the pro

ecided to raise standards for graduation. Students who had begun the program were upset. Faculty felt strongly that the new standards were justified and necessary for the integrity of the program.

Mark immediately arranged meetings with both the faculty and the students. The day before, one of the faculty members came in with concerns. He was tense and jittery, his body language indicating that he didn't trust that he would be supported.

That Tuesday, Mark met first with the faculty. He invited everyone to speak, giving each his full attention. He listened from an attitude of inclusiveness and respect, and he listened for what was important to each person. He asked questions sourced from what he was hearing. Then he and the faculty met individually with each of the ten students involved, providing them with a status report and the opportunity for input.

The end results:

- The faculty decided to allow students who had begun the program under one set of standards to finish under that same set.

- The faculty felt validated and supported.

- The faculty felt that their standards had been upheld and the integrity of the pro

dicating that he didn't trust that he would be supported.

That Tuesday, Mark met first with the faculty. He invited everyone to speak, giving each his full attention. He listened from an attitude of inclusiveness and respect, and he listened for what was important to each person. He asked questions sourced from what he was hearing. Then he and the faculty met individually with each of the ten students involved, providing them with a status report and the opportunity for input.

The end results:

- The faculty decided to allow students who had begun the program under one set of standards to finish under that same set.

- The faculty felt validated and supported.

- The faculty felt that their standards had been upheld and the integrity of the pro

of the ten students involved, providing them with a status report and the opportunity for input.

The end results:

- The faculty decided to allow students who had begun the program under one set of standards to finish under that same set.

- The faculty felt validated and supported.

- The faculty felt that their standards had been upheld and the integrity of the program was in tact.

- The students felt heard and supported.

- The students were in agreement with the decisions about their grades.

Indications that the culture is changing:

- The faculty member who had come to Mark's office tense and concerned was visibly relaxed and indicated he felt supported.

- Instead of leaving him terse notes, one of his direct reports is coming in to speak with him when she has something to say.

- The Computer Science Program has undergone a great deal of turbulence, and the woman in charge of it spoke to Mark's boss and acknowledged Mark's ability to navigate the challenges.

People are appreciating Mark's contributions - improving processes, inclusiveness, an orientation of collaboration, and his modeling of respect. The cornerstone to the progress, one of Mark's core strengths, is his listening. He is a powerful model of leading by listening.

Your culture may not be as adversarial as the one Mark walked into - and it may have aspects of it. What's the thorny situation in your workplace that could use some good old fashioned listening right now? Can you move into listening without knowing the outcome first, open to what might develop? Can you go in knowing that you want the best possible outcome yet without attachment to what that might be? Give it a try and let us know how it goes.